Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <44EB2F2E.2010303@twdata.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 09:22:06 -0700
From: Don Brown <mrdon@twdata.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Macintosh/20060719)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Struts Developers List <dev@struts.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Whose log is this anyway? (was Re: [s1] Commons-Lang)
References: <8b3ce3790608220401u12a0aa96h542607da8df15917@mail.gmail.com>
	 <a74683f90608220730w508909bai51c76820f91a6d71@mail.gmail.com>
	 <44EB2C60.5090004@twdata.org>
 <a74683f90608220914w5cead712pef6a306088c1fef4@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <a74683f90608220914w5cead712pef6a306088c1fef4@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Well, for one, we only really need one logging instance for the whole 
library.  Second, and admittedly this is subjective, the 
java.util.logging API is a horribly designed, obtuse API.  I'd rather 
see us write a small, clean API along the lines of Seam's logging class 
that utilizes varargs to reduce the need for isDebugEnabled().

http://docs.jboss.com/seam/latest/reference/en/html/concepts.html#d0e2598

Don

Bob Lee wrote:
> How is j.u.logging overkill, especially considering using it would 
> mean one
> less dependency? From our standpoint, the only thing we care about is 
> Logger
> anyway.
>
> Bob
>
> On 8/22/06, Don Brown <mrdon@twdata.org> wrote:
>>
>> I'd rather use java.util.logging than commons-logging, but I think both
>> are overkill for a library.  I think Nathan is spot on and we should
>> look to using Velocity's logging classes, imported into our codebase.
>> The whole logging "framework" we'd need would be like two or three
>> classes.
>>
>> Jarjar would also be nice, perhaps in conjunction with Velocity's
>> logging classes.  It would help us solve the xwork version problem 
>> nicely.
>>
>> Don
>>
>> Bob Lee wrote:
>> > On 8/22/06, Ted Husted <husted@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Say, wasn't there a mention of some package that renamed packages
>> >> dynamically or something? That's the real issue. Two versions of the
>> >> same package name on the same classpath.
>> >
>> >
>> > jarjar
>> >
>> > In the case of logging though, we should just use java.util.logging.
>> >
>> > If you still want to use log4j, why not write a j.u.logging Handler
>> which
>> > logs to log4j? Do we really need an API to decouple us from an API 
>> which
>> > decouples us from a logging implementation, or is one level of
>> > indirection
>> > sufficient? This is why everyone makes fun of clogging.
>> >
>> > Bob
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>
>>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org